The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 President’s Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
    • Media
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 President’s Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
    • Media
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Media
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
      • Summit Sponsors
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Master Class 5.0 Trial Academy 2021
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

$1 Million in Attorneys’ Fees Awarded Against Pharmacy Giant Rite Aid

Posted on November 12, 2015 by Eleanor Smith

Attorneys' Fees

A law firm was awarded more than $1 in attorneys’ fees after a jury awarded its client $8.7 million in an employment termination case. The plaintiff, a former Rite Aid store manager, was wrongfully terminated and faced discrimination after he was injured in a store robbery.

Dedicated Employee Fired

Plaintiff Robert Leggins began working for Rite Aid in 1985 and filed suit in 2013. The suit stemmed from workplace discrimination that Leggins alleged started after he was injured in the store robbery. Leggins also alleged that since the arrival of a new district manager, he had experienced discrimination based on both his race and disability.

Leggins was working in the Rite Aid store he was tasked with running one night in 2007 when the robbery occurred. He was attacked during the robbery and suffered a neck injury that led to several surgeries. Leggins alleged that despite his injury, his supervisors forced him to do hard manual labor and mocked him for his injury. At times, Rite Aid management even implied he was faking it to shirk his work duties.

Leggins asked the new Rite Aid district manager for a transfer to a smaller store in a better neighborhood so he could work around his hurt neck, but the manager told him that “all black people do is complain.” Rite Aid responded that the decision to fire Leggins was the culmination of his failure to perform his job adequately for the previous two years. Rite Aid’s motion for summary judgment called Leggins’ allegations about race and disability discrimination “his own rank speculation.”

See Also: Utah Employees Now Have the Right to Self-Defense in the Workplace

Leggins brought suit in 2013 and the jury agreed with him that the company harassed and punished him for his injury. The jury did not find, however, that the company or its managers discriminated against Leggins for his race. The jury awarded Leggins $3.7 million for lost wages and other losses plus an additional $5 million in punitive damages for his claims of discrimination and wrongful termination.

A Textbook Discrimination Case

Earlier this summer, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael L. Stern denied two Rite Aid post-trial motions seeking to slash or vacate the verdict. Despite standing firm on his decision in the case, Stern said it was “vigorously contested with good attorneys on both sides” with numerous witnesses.

According to the state of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), a court has the discretion to award to the prevailing party reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs in these situations. Judge Stern said while the case appeared to be a “garden variety” employment matter, the legal fight surrounding it certainly was not.

Leggins’ attorney, Carney Shegerian said:

“Realistically, how many plaintiffs’ attorneys (let alone plaintiffs) can afford the raw costs, overhead staffing, and firm costs to take a case like this – with its difficult facts – to trial against a global law firm such as Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, which used an army of attorneys at trial, numerous additional attorneys throughout litigation, and a plethora of paralegals, assistants, staff, and other personnel who were present both inside and outside the courtroom? The only reason attorneys would risk their money and time on such a venture, while declining other lucrative matters, would be the expectation that, if they prevail and vindicate critical statutory rights against a large employer, they will be fully compensated for the massive risk undertaken, with an enhancement for the sheer difficulties of a case like this and the superior results obtained.”

Rite Aid attorneys argued the $500 and $700 per hour numbers Leggins’ attorneys sought were unreasonable. Counsel for Rite Aid also tried pointing out that Leggins’ case is just a “run of the mill” termination case not unique in its defense. Judge Stern disagreed and acknowledged the rates could be due to inflation, but are in no way “off the charts.”

Posted in Blog, Business Law, Employment

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Subscribe to Blog and VFJ via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog, the Voice for Justice and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Toyota Will Pay $180M to Settle Violations of the Clean-Air Act

Toyota Will Pay $180M to Settle Violations of the Clean-Air Act

The U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that the United States has[Read More...]
Boeing's Insitu Will Pay $25M to Settle a Whistleblower Complaint About Used Drone Parts

Boeing's Insitu Will Pay $25M to Settle a Whistleblower Complaint About Used Drone Parts

Bingen, Wash.-based Insitu, a Boeing subsidiary, has agreed to pay $25 million to settle allegations that it used recycl[Read More...]
Deutsche Bank Agrees to Settle Criminal and Civil Charges for $130M

Deutsche Bank Agrees to Settle Criminal and Civil Charges for $130M

DEUTSCHE Bank AG agreed to pay US$130 million to settle criminal and civil charges that it bribed foreign officials and manip[Read More...]
Boeing Pays $2.5B to Settle Charges Tied to the 737 MAX Crashes

Boeing Pays $2.5B to Settle Charges Tied to the 737 MAX Crashes

Boeing has agreed to pay just over $2.5 billion to resolve a federal charge of “criminal misconduct” for how its [Read More...]
Texas Attorney General Seeks $43M in Google Antitrust Lawsuit

Texas Attorney General Seeks $43M in Google Antitrust Lawsuit

The mass exodus of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's top staff over accusations of bribery against their former boss has le[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.